#835718 Jan 8, 2013
sept that he's lighter..
#835719 Jan 8, 2013
Are you really that stupid? Ted Cruz is not what I would call a white man. Marco Rubio is also hispanic. Better hope that no more hispanics get up to speed on what you liberals are doing to our country. Wewill be the majority soon and I voted conservative to help preserve my religious rights and my precious freedoms you wackos on the left are trying to take. As more and more Hispanics learn and vote with knowledge instead of tradition, maybe, just maybe we will be able to save our country. Hispanics are family oriented, religiously inclined, God fearing people. Once the rest get up to speed, liberalism will begin to go to hell, with its ilk.
#835721 Jan 8, 2013
Black racist pig.
#835722 Jan 8, 2013
Democrat gun-grabbing will not end until gun owners run out of ammo.
There will be civil war with tragic results.
#835727 Jan 8, 2013
Yes,FOX is #1 in ratings!It isn't enough to beat the entire Liberal media and you uninformed voters!50 million Obama lover voters on welfare,many more on other Givemint dole programs!
You can't make it in life without being coddled by the Democrats and the Muslim Obama.He would rather fund the Muslim Brotherhood than you loser Blacks!
BOYCOTT ALL MINORITY BUSINESS unless they are conservatives!Do not tip Blacks unless you know they understand!Do not hire any Black people unless they are conservatives!This message will work!
#835728 Jan 8, 2013
How about Obama? God is our judge.
Since: Jul 11
#835729 Jan 9, 2013
Fox is a joke and for the most part seen as the redneck version of SNL so it's a comedy show. In fact you can see a condensed version of Fox news on the Daily show, it is watched by more viewers than the whole of fox news put together. So not much credibility as a news service, but gets lots of laughs. Viewed by the rest of the sane world in the same light as Stalin's bedtime stories.
#835730 Jan 9, 2013
Gangsta ain't something one can just turn overnight boy. Half assing like you talking is very, very dangerous! You might bump into a bullet or stumble on your death. Moral of the story, you just can't be what your not. Now if you read any of my earlier post you would've noticed I'm actually not racist. I have family members of damn near every race including half white kids birthed by a white woman. A half dominican nefew & a half puerto rican nefew. A puerto rican girlfriend. A host of white/black cousins. I'm far from racist. I just respond to racism with racism & ignorance with ignorance. Which 1 are you white boy ?
#835731 Jan 9, 2013
what are you going to say when Obamas term is over that you won or somethin???
it's not a fcking dictator it's presdient sjesuf cking christ mon..
#835732 Jan 9, 2013
if you are mad at Obama for what he just took a job that's all..
why weird people want to say he is the most powerful person int he world..
there's a balance of power.. leave the guy alone omfg..
he ain't gonna be there for all eternity rulling over you he'll step down when it's time sjesheesh..
#835733 Jan 9, 2013
all he's doing is it's like managing a business.. the company it's like a big business..
#835734 Jan 9, 2013
they keep bothering the guy because they think that he's making fun of them.. by becoming president..
what there are plenty of black people who actually hate and wanna destroy white people
who deserve negative treatment..
#835735 Jan 9, 2013
Obama Ignores Fast & Furious, Rushes to Announce ‘Gun Control Task Group’ in Wake of Newtown
Posted by Jammie on Dec 19, 2012 at 8:14 am
Not to diminish the horrors of Newtown in any way, but where was a task group to investigate Fast & Furious when his Attorney General ran guns to Mexico that resulted in hundreds of deaths?
Today we’ll get more talk and no action.
According to CBS reporter Norah O’Donnell, President Obama is planning to make a statement at noon today announcing a new task group to formulate gun policies in the aftermath of the Newton Connecticut tragedy.
Meanwhile, the guns Eric Holder ran to Mexico are still being found at crime scenes.
A gun found at the scene of a shootout between a Mexican drug cartel and soldiers where a beauty queen died was part of the botched “Fast and Furious” operation, CBS Newsreports.
Authorities had said that Maria Susana Flores Gamez was likely used as a human shield and that an automatic rifle had been found near her body after the Nov. 23 shootout.
Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, tells CBS News that the Justice Department did not notify Congress that a Fast and Furious firearm was found at the scene in Sinaloa.
Since last Friday we’ve had a mostly incoherent media embarrassing themselves on gun issues, yet they’ve largely been absent when it came to Fast & Furious. Why is that?
Let us never forget the victims of Eric Holder.
#835736 Jan 9, 2013
Rather than a botched attempt to catch criminals, was the ATF program actually an attempt to advance gun-control efforts by an administration that has blamed Mexican violence on easy access to U.S. weapons?
If "Operation Fast and Furious" was merely a botched attempt at law enforcement, why was a supervisor of the operation, David Voth, "jovial, if not, not giddy but just delighted about" marked guns showing up at crime scenes in Mexico, as career Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent John Dodson told Rep. Darrell Issa's House Oversight Committee?
Perhaps because all was going as planned until it was learned that two of the AK-47s recovered at the scene of the fatal shooting of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry in December were bought in ATF's Operation Fast and Furious. That wasn't supposed to happen.
"Allowing loads of weapons that we knew to be destined for criminals — this was the plan," Dodson testified to the panel. "It was so mandated."
ATF agent Olindo James Casa said that "on several occasions I personally requested to interdict or seize firearms, but I was always ordered to stand down and not to seize the firearms."
Yet, as we've noted, gun-tracking operations stopped at the border. That seems odd if the purpose was to catch gun traffickers and their drug-lord bosses. It makes sense, however, if the real purpose was to perpetuate, in the interests of pursuing the administration's gun-control agenda, what Bob Owens of Pajamas Media calls the "90% lie."
Unwilling to guarantee a secure southern border, and as part of a campaign to reinstate an expired assault weapons ban, the administration has charged that much of Mexico's gun violence is our fault. Both governments have pushed the myth that 90% of weapons confiscated by Mexican authorities originate in the U.S.
Fox News has reported that, according to ATF Special Agent William Newell, Mexico sent about 11,000 guns to the U.S. for tracing in 2007-08, out of about 35,000 confiscated. Of that 11,000, 6,000 were successfully traced. And of that number, 5,114, or 90%, were found to have originated in the U.S.
Subscribe to the IBD Editorials Podcast
Weapons that originated in foreign countries are not sent to the U.S. for tracing. Neither are weapons of Mexican army deserters or those stolen from armories.
Bill McMahon, ATF deputy assistant director, testified that of 100,000 weapons recovered by Mexican authorities, only 18,000 were made, sold or imported from the U.S. And of those 18,000, just 7,900 came from sales by licensed gun dealers. That's 8%, not 90%.
So why the lie and why create Fast and Furious, a program designed to put dangerous weapons into criminal hands? We forget that from 1994 to 2002 President Obama was a director of the Joyce Foundation, a progressive organization dedicated to "social justice" and eroding Second Amendment rights.
Obama has advocated what he called "sensible restrictions" on gun ownership and even thought the District of Columbia's total gun ban was constitutional before the U.S. Supreme Court ruled otherwise.
Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/0622...
#835737 Jan 9, 2013
During the 2008 campaign, when Hillary Clinton attacked Obama's famous remark about bitter Pennsylvania townsfolk clinging to their guns, then-Sen. Obama dismissingly called her "Annie Oakley" and said she was pandering to gun owners.
Was Fast and Furious merely a poorly conceived scheme about which Attorney General Eric Holder and President Obama knew little or nothing? Or was it a deliberate attempt to inflate the embarrassingly low true number of guns traceable to the U.S.?
Was Watergate just a third-rate burglary?
Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/0622...
#835738 Jan 9, 2013
One of the persistent ideas that has driven interest in the Fast & Furious story among many on the right is the idea that the entire operation was created by forces within the Obama Administration as an operation designed not to catch Mexican drug gangs illegally buying guns in the United States, but to essentially manufacture evidence that could be used to push for additional gun control legislation. This theory has circulated within the conservative blogosphere for months now, but achieved much more prominence this weekend when House Government Oversight and Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa suggested on ABC’s News’s This Week that this theory may in fact be true:(video and transcript of Issa’s comments at the link)
This morning on “This Week,” Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., continued pressing a conspiracy theory that the botched “Fast and Furious” operation could have been part of a larger plan by the Obama administration to push through tougher gun laws in the United States. But Issa had no firm evidence to back the claim, and said he could not be certain that gun control efforts were ever an original aim of sending guns across the border.
“Here’s the real answer as to gun control. We have e-mail from people involved in this that are talking about using what they’re finding here to support the — basically assault weapons ban or greater reporting. So chicken or egg? We don’t know which came first; we probably never will,” Issa said this morning on “This Week.”“We do know that during this — this ‘Fast and Furious’ operation, there were e-mails in which they’re saying we can use this as part of additional reporting or things like assault weapons ban. So the people involved saw the benefit of what — what they were gathering. Whether or not that was their original purpose, we probably will never know.”
Issa’s response came after I challenged him on comments he made in April at an NRA convention to NRA News’“Cam & Company” program, where he said,“Could it be that what they really were thinking of was in fact to use this walking of guns in order to promote an assault weapons ban? Many think so. And they haven’t come up with an explanation that would cause any of us not to agree.”
PJ Media’s Bill Whittle argues passionately in favor of this hypothesis in a recent video, and Investors Business Daily lays out its argument in favor of the theory in an Editorial which cites evidence of emails exchanged between Arizona ATF officials that discuss using Fast & Furious “evidence” in a White Paper that was being prepared on the issue of the need to tighten rules applied to gun dealers. As I noted in a post I wrote last week, though, all of those email were exchanged after Fast and Furious had already been in effect for nearly a year, and several were changed just before the program was shut down completely in the wake of the death of Border Patrol evidence Brian Terry. While it’s somewhat disturbing that the ATF may have been trying to use “evidence” from their own blown operation to make a case for gun control when said evidence really provided no such support is disturbing, it isn’t proof that the entire program was designed as essentially a political and law enforcement Potemkin Village for the purpose of manufacturing such “evidence.”
Power Line’s Paul Migrenhoff points out some of the logical flaws in the conspiracy theory argument:
First, Fast and Furious does not appear to have been the brainchild of President Obama or Attorney General Holder. Rather, the program reportedly was formulated by the ATF in Phoenix in response to an edict from Washington to focus on eliminating arms trafficking networks, as opposed to capturing low-level buyers, as had occurred under traditional interdiction programs. If Fast and Furious had been the product of a conspiracy by the administration to promote gun control legislation, the program would have come from the top down, not from the bottom up.
#835739 Jan 9, 2013
Second, Obama and Holder probably would not have believed that increased violence in Mexico could lead to tougher regulation of guns in the U.S. Americans simply don’t care enough about Mexico to alter domestic policy based on what occurs there, especially when it comes to an issue as passionately and endlessly argued as gun control. Americans view violence in Mexico the way they viewed violence in Colombia – unfortunate, typical, and not our problem at any fundamental level.
It was always possible that a few Americans, especially some involved in law enforcement, would be killed with guns that were part of Fast and Furious. But in this event, the probable consequence is what we have witnessed – major embarrassment for the administration, not an effective vehicle for advocating more gun control. On balance, it seems unlikely that the administration would come up with a program this risky in the pie-in-the-sky hope of incresing gun control.
Why, then, was the program implemented? As noted, considerable frustration existed over attempts to deal with gun running through interdiction at the point of sale because this form of enforcement resulted in the apprehension of only the small fry. Those who came up with Fast and Furious probably hoped that if guns followed their natural course into Mexico, they would lead to much more important players. Wire taps and other surveillance of Mexican cartel bosses would assist in nailing these players, or so the thinking went.
It was a very bad idea, poorly executed. But, as conservatives should understand better than most, the government frequently implements very bad ideas and does so incompetently. In any case, trying to apprehend cartel bosses through Fast and Furious strikes me as less foolish than intentionally increasing shootings in Mexico to enhance the cause of gun control in the U.S.
This strikes me as largely correct. If this was a conspiracy theory, it was an incredibly poorly designed one from Day One and it depended on Americans giving much of a crap about Mexicans killing Mexicans, which honestly doesn’t seem to be very likely. More importantly, though, and as I argued myself last week, it is far more plausible to believe that what happened in Fast & Furious operation was the result of a group of people with a bad idea who put together a bad plan that was badly executed. You don’t need to look very far to find examples of other badly executed government operations than that it was part of some nefarious political conspiracy. Indeed, the extent to which this seems to occur on a regular basis, and to which the details of said operations inevitably leak out at some point, makes it hard to believe that a true nefarious conspiracy could ever really be executed by American political officials. Watergate was arguably such a conspiracy, but it was so incompetently handled that its main even was referred to, quite correctly, as a “third-rate burglary.” The remarkable thing about conspiracy theorists, most of whom tend to be very anti-government, is that they seem to ascribe far more competence and ability to keep a secret to government officials than available evidence would suggested is warranted
#835740 Jan 9, 2013
There’s another reason that the conspiracy theory story falls apart, and it’s an issue for which the advocates of the theory don’t seem to be able to provide an answer. From the time he was a candidate all the way through the first three years of his Presidency, there’s not been any evidence that the Obama Administration placed any real priority on trying to strengthen gun control laws. If Fast & Furious really was part of a conspiracy to tighten those laws, then where was the legislation that would have been waiting to be pushed once the “evidence” started coming out? Even during the two years when Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress and the White House, there was no serious effort to push any such legislation. Mostly, this is because there just isn’t a political constituency for gun control like there was during the first two years of the Clinton Administration when things like the Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban were passed. Indeed, many Democrats lost their jobs in 1994 because of their votes on those bills, and the GOP took over Congress, so it strikes me as unlikely that Democrats would want to kick that hornet’s nest again any time soon.
As I’ve said several times when I’ve written about this story, there are legitimate questions about Fast & Furious that deserve an answer. It’s the proper role of Congress to ask those questions and the Administration’s reticence to cooperate fully in that investigation dis-serves the public and only serves to reinforce the notion of some that they have something to hide. At the same time, though, Issa does the investigation no favors by pandering to the conspiracy theorists. As Joe Friday used to say, Congressman, just the facts, that’s all you need to be looking for. The rest is a waste of time.
#835741 Jan 9, 2013
Documents obtained by CBS News show that the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) discussed using their covert operation "Fast and Furious" to argue for controversial new rules about gun sales.
PICTURES: ATF "Gunwalking" scandal timeline
In Fast and Furious, ATF secretly encouraged gun dealers to sell to suspected traffickers for Mexican drug cartels to go after the "big fish." But ATF whistleblowers told CBS News and Congress it was a dangerous practice called "gunwalking," and it put thousands of weapons on the street. Many were used in violent crimes in Mexico. Two were found at the murder scene of a U.S. Border Patrol agent.
ATF officials didn't intend to publicly disclose their own role in letting Mexican cartels obtain the weapons, but emails show they discussed using the sales, including sales encouraged by ATF, to justify a new gun regulation called "Demand Letter 3". That would require some U.S. gun shops to report the sale of multiple rifles or "long guns." Demand Letter 3 was so named because it would be the third ATF program demanding gun dealers report tracing information.
On July 14, 2010 after ATF headquarters in Washington D.C. received an update on Fast and Furious, ATF Field Ops Assistant Director Mark Chait emailed Bill Newell, ATF's Phoenix Special Agent in Charge of Fast and Furious:
"Bill - can you see if these guns were all purchased from the same (licensed gun dealer) and at one time. We are looking at anecdotal cases to support a demand letter on long gun multiple sales. Thanks."
More Fast and Furious coverage:
Memos contradict Holder on Fast and Furious
Agent: I was ordered to let guns "walk" into Mexico
Gunwalking scandal uncovered at ATF
On Jan. 4, 2011, as ATF prepared a press conference to announce arrests in Fast and Furious, Newell saw it as "(A)nother time to address Multiple Sale on Long Guns issue." And a day after the press conference, Chait emailed Newell: "Bill--well done yesterday...(I)n light of our request for Demand letter 3, this case could be a strong supporting factor if we can determine how many multiple sales of long guns occurred during the course of this case."
This revelation angers gun rights advocates. Larry Keane, a spokesman for National Shooting Sports Foundation, a gun industry trade group, calls the discussion of Fast and Furious to argue for Demand Letter 3 "disappointing and ironic." Keane says it's "deeply troubling" if sales made by gun dealers "voluntarily cooperating with ATF's flawed 'Operation Fast & Furious' were going to be used by some individuals within ATF to justify imposing a multiple sales reporting requirement for rifles."
The Gun Dealers' Quandary
Several gun dealers who cooperated with ATF told CBS News and Congressional investigators they only went through with suspicious sales because ATF asked them to.
Sometimes it was against the gun dealer's own best judgment.
Read the email
In April, 2010 a licensed gun dealer cooperating with ATF was increasingly concerned about selling so many guns. "We just want to make sure we are cooperating with ATF and that we are not viewed as selling to the bad guys," writes the gun dealer to ATF Phoenix officials, "(W)e were hoping to put together something like a letter of understanding to alleviate concerns of some type of recourse against us down the road for selling these items."
Read the email
ATF's group supervisor on Fast and Furious David Voth assures the gun dealer there's nothing to worry about. "We (ATF) are continually monitoring these suspects using a variety of investigative techniques which I cannot go into detail."
Two months later, the same gun dealer grew more agitated.
"I wanted to make sure that none of the firearms that were sold per our conversation with you and various ATF agents could or would ever end up south of the border or in the hands of the bad guys.
#835742 Jan 9, 2013
What are you a "professor" of anyway? Mendacity, prevarication and obfuscation?
We're not talking about Afghanistan so let's put that aside and address Iraq which was the subject of the post. Congress authorized the use of military force only as a last resort if all other diplomatic measures failed. George W didn't let these other measures run their course forcing UN inspectors to abandon their searches in anticipation of the invasion.
Our actions in Libya were part of a larger NATO operation and was mainly supportive and no American forces were on the ground.
There was never any stand down order given when our ambassador and his staff were being attacked liar. Everything that could be done was done.
Contrary to your inane assertion, national security was not eased up during the Clinton administration but under Bush who downgraded the position of National Coordinator for Counterterrorism Richard Clarke so that his memos had to filter through the White House deputies instead of going directly to the President. The Bush administration did nothing about Al Qaeda until after 9/11 and Republicans ridiculed Clinton for bombing their training sites and accused him of "wagging the dog". But again it's not Afghanistan at issue here.
The nerve gas attacks on the Kurds happened during the Reagan administration moron, and subsequent to the first Gulf War UN inspectors dismantled and destroyed Hussein's production facilities stockpiles. Iraq was under constant surveillance and any attempt to bury or transfer these weapons would have been detected. With an invasion imminent why would he get rid of the weapons that would have raised the price on the invaders? It's not like he had anything to lose at that point.
You're an idiot!
Add your comments below
|Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10)||28 min||KiMerde||49,751|
|Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08)||43 min||LessHypeMoreFact||46,552|
|A Culture Riot Comes to Chicago||46 min||Culture Auditor||2|
|BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09)||1 hr||Jacques from Ottawa||177,940|
|RAY RICE was a BAD BOY, but what about JEREMY H...||1 hr||NFL BLACK THUGS||1|
|Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09)||1 hr||Global Lukewarming||68,461|
|care to join me for some fun||1 hr||Abu69||1|
Find what you want!
Search Chicago Forum Now